I'm no expert on listening, but I think do have a sense of when I personally feel heard.
I don't agree with this piece at all, and I don't like the vibe of the author. The very first paragraph has a narcissism in it that rubs me the wrong way. Like the whole world let her down for not centering her in conversations the way her therapist caretaker did.
> Some simple and powerful phrases to use when someone is feeling feels: “I hear you.” “I bet it is hard.” “That makes sense.”
All three of these seriously suck to hear. IMO these are actually worse than the phrases the author says to never say. Someone telling you "You have no reason to feel that way" can easily be challenged. Someone disingenuously saying "I hear you" like a robot can't be.
The entire idea that there are boilerplate "powerful phrases" you can drop to make someone feel heard is nonsense. These generic phrases are determined ahead of hearing someone speak, so they can not reflect the act of hearing.
There's a reason why this brand of non-communication is so popular in HR circles. What this author is advocating is that we import patronizing HR speak into every day conversation. No thanks.
>Replace all of the shocking, mean, hateful, incorrect, ignorant, offensive, cruel things coming out of this person’s mouth with “I’m hurt! I’m hurt! I’m hurt! I’m hurt. I’m hurrrrt.”
This is narcissistic logic. When people are angry at you, and attacking you - and they do not have a clinical mood or personality disorder - you must accept that there may be a reason behind it. Things said in the heat of the moment are not always fair or measured, but they are rarely meaningless. When you decide that nothing someone is saying is valid because they are hurt, you will probably just invalidate and hurt them further.
The idea that the most important thing in a situation like this is to not be upset yourself is also narcissistic logic. Although presented as practical advice to not escalate, it's really just the authors need to "win" the interaction. It says "I'm the level-headed and rational one, while the other person is crazy and flying off the handle." Acting this way can escalate the situation even more than becoming angry yourself, but it will do so in a way that allows you to avoid taking any personal responsibility for that escalation.
I have to wonder what situations and interpersonal relationships the author is in that she finds this to be such a relevant piece of advice. These experiences don't sound like a model for healthy communication.
>5. Don’t relate.
This entire section is deeply narcissistic. The one-upmanship thing does happen, for sure. But it's not the reason people share their own experiences in the course of you sharing yours. Her conception of why people share reflects a deeply disconnected view of other people. Reads as "sometimes I'm talking to someone who is so self-absorbed they don't understand the conversation is 100% about me!"
Of the whole article, this section was most reminiscent of the cognitive style of diagnosed NPDs I've known.
>6. Ask questions.
This is the only decent advice in here, and I can't really fault it. But there is still something off here. It's like the goal of asking these questions is to "make someone feel heard" rather than to actually hear them.